But I mostly agree with your point. Shanahan has to walk a really tight line akin to a referee. On the one hand, you want to stamp out behavior that is dangerous to other players and will make the league look bad.

On the other hand, in playoff hockey, a suspension to even a plug can turn the tide one way or the other, and you never want to have that much power over the outcome of the series. In playoff hockey, the status of the person offended and the guilty player is going to be taken into consideration.

And it's hard to establish any consistency for that particular reason. I don't agree with the blatant favoritism they show, but at the same time you don't want to screw the Predators by suspending their best player and captain.

At the end of the day, it's a bureaucratic process. And such processes are inherently inconsistent.

Honestly, I think instead of suspensions, it'd be better to just fine the s*** out of them. Shanny fining Weber $2,500 would be akin to him fininng me 45 cents. WTF is that supposed to deter? Fine him 500k, bet you it never happens again. AND he still gets to play, so it's win//win imo

The max the NHL can fine a player is 2.5k. It's in the CBA. You can bet that'll probably change in the new CBA though.

However, even fining a player becomes difficult. 500k would be nothing to Weber, who makes over 7 million a year. But 500k to an AHL callup would be their entire season's pay. You could try and fine players based off their contract, but that would just make it so that two players committing the same act would be punished differently because of their contract.

The ideal solution would be to have a department free of the influence of the owners making the decisions. Shanahan tried to do that early in the season (with the massive suspensions), but the owners cracked down, his job was threatened and he reduced the penalties greatly.

The max the NHL can fine a player is 2.5k. It's in the CBA. You can bet that'll probably change in the new CBA though.

However, even fining a player becomes difficult. 500k would be nothing to Weber, who makes over 7 million a year. But 500k to an AHL callup would be their entire season's pay. You could try and fine players based off their contract, but that would just make it so that two players committing the same act would be punished differently because of their contract.

I know it's in the CBA and everything, I know the rules I just think THEY need to change. Maybe you could do it on an increase level like the NFL does, more dirty hits = higher the fine. What did James Harrison wind up forfitting last year anyway?

I just think the league looks laughable when Shea gets 2,500 for plowing Hank's head into the board twice in a row, but Torts gets 20,000 for useing colorful language in an off ice interview.

If they just increase it to even 50k max, then suddenly a good portion of third/fourth liners are going to become ineffective. They will start fearing for their monetary security.

The $2500 fine is a joke. That's like a $10-20 fine for the average working stiff. So, if your ONLY deterrent to getting into a bar fight or cheap shotting someone on the street was a $10-20 fine, there'd be a LOT more violence in society! Make these guys forfeit 20% of their annual salary...and watch the goonery either go away, or these players retire early!

But again, 20% of the annual salary is different for each player. That means if Weber gets fined for slamming Zetterberg's head against the glass, he's losing 1.5 million. If Arron Asham does the same thing, he's losing 155k.

It's got the same problem as the current system, except in reverse. While the current one appears to be more lenient on star players, this one is lenient on 3rd/4th line grinders.

But again, 20% of the annual salary is different for each player. That means if Weber gets fined for slamming Zetterberg's head against the glass, he's losing 1.5 million. If Arron Asham does the same thing, he's losing 155k.

It's got the same problem as the current system, except in reverse. While the current one appears to be more lenient on star players, this one is lenient on 3rd/4th line grinders.

On an absolute level, the maximum fine has to go up. Whether it maxes out at 20% of the salary or something like that, so Weber COULD be fined more than Asham but doesn't have to be, the maximum needs to be higher than its current level.

I don't think the fines should be % based because that already effectively happens with game suspensions without pay.

I agree that the maximum amount one can be fined should be raised, but there's no way to settle on what amount is the right amount.

They almost have to settle on an amount that's ridiculously low for all players (like the current $2500) because any other way favors one class of players over the other.

Percentage based would favor those 3rd/4th line grinders that get paid less (since 20% of 150k is much less than 20% of 8 million) and a set higher number (like 100k) would favor the star players (since 100k is nothing to Staal, but quite a dent in Stewart's paycheck).

Just curious, since Google didn't bring up anything. Does anyone know who the President of the Player Safety Department is? Shanahan's official title is "Senior Vice President", so there's got to be a President somewhere, right?

I think the "percent of salary" is the best way to go. Making the fine a set number, penalizes lower paid players more, and is not going to have any effect on guys making $5 million per season, or $60,000 per game! See how inconsequential a $2500 fine is to a guy like Weber, who makes $91,000 per game! That's a $5 fine to someone who makes $60,000 per year! It means nothing! He can blow that on dinner with a couple of teammates in one night!

I like a staggered percentage system. 5% for your 1st head shot, 10% for the 2nd, 15% for the 3rd, etc. problem is, the NHLPA will never sign off on it...and we're back to square one.

That's exactly why it WILL work. You're just helping prove my point. The actual dollar amount isn't as important as the percent of that players salary. Why penalize a lower paid player more severely for the same dirty hit, as you would a guy who makes 5x as much? So you think the same dollar amount is more fair than a percentage? That makes absolutely no sense.

That's exactly why it WILL work. You're just helping prove my point. The actual dollar amount isn't as important as the percent of that players salary. Why penalize a lower paid player more severely for the same dirty hit, as you would a guy who makes 5x as much? So you think the same dollar amount is more fair than a percentage? That makes absolutely no sense.

...Why penalize a higher paid player more severely for the same dirty hit? If two players commit the same crime, their punishments should be the same, regardless of their paycheck. Saying that 1 player can commit a crime and lose 2 million because of it, while another player can commit the same crime four separate times and not lose that amount makes no sense.

Wouldn't suspensions without pay be the easiest way to make the severity of a "fine" more equal?

Say Asham and Weber get suspended for 5 games apiece, both without pay, and both suspensions will be served next season if they don't finish them out in the playoffs?

Problem solved?

Edit for clarification: The suspension system would be clearly defined and knowable, of course, or as clearly defined as you can make it while still giving the league office leeway for out of the ordinary situations. A blow to the head is worth X games, punching a defenseless player is going to cost you X games, and so on.

Edit II: Is it me, or are the fluid, dynamic aspects of hockey incredibly tough to judge and discipline? I'm glad it's not my job.

Because of the disparity of salaries in the NHL, I think it makes a lot more sense for the penalty to be a percentage. We're not talking about one guy making $5,000 more a year, we're talking almost 10x from the lowest league minimum salaries, to the highest paid players.

Shea Weber was fined $2500. Like I said, he makes $90,000 a game. He gave up 1/36th of his game salary (I know, they aren't "paid" for playoff games, bear with me). Asham would give up 1/4 of his game salary for the same $2500 fine.

Because of the disparity of salaries in the NHL, I think it makes a lot more sense for the penalty to be a percentage. We're not talking about one guy making $5,000 more a year, we're talking almost 10x from the lowest league minimum salaries, to the highest paid players.

Shea Weber was fined $2500. Like I said, he makes $90,000 a game. He gave up 1/36th of his game salary (I know, they aren't "paid" for playoff games, bear with me). Asham would give up 1/4 of his game salary for the same $2500 fine.

So let's say they're both suspended 5 games, without pay. Back of the envelope calculations say that for Weber that equates to $450,000; Asham it's $50k. I'm not sure how to fix that without some sort of multiplier or factor to apply to higher paid players that will be rejected by the NHLPA.

The ultimate point is to make the penalty strong enough to the individual player that they won't commit the infraction again. Losing a day's pay, no matter what amount you make, just seems to me to be about as strong of a deterrent as you can come up with.

Not trying to argue with your plan, since 1.) it makes more sense than the current rules and 2.) I'm trying to envision a world where players aren't hauled off in ambulances, if that's at all possible.